Why is grading top heavy??

[1Cool]

I think its strange that the over-all difference between a 9.8 and a 7.0 is a small corner crease and a couple spine marks. But the difference between a 5.0 and a 2.0 is a world of difference. Grading would be a lot easier if the difference between higher grades was a little more than one defect. Anyone else think this is strange?

[mdandy8]

Oh, it's strange, but have you looked around? We're all pretty strange. I bought a box of comics yesterday and took them from the LCS to work. I thought nothing of spending the $150, but everyone at work thought I was psychotic...so there you go...

 

But to the point of this post: I do think it's crazy, esp the attention paid to the grades between 9.0 and 10.0 (9.8, etc etc, I mean you never see a 5.9 right?) And you can't tell me there is a way to identify the difference between a 9.8 and a 9.7 (which you almost never see). So it's pretty much a *spoon* shoot.

 

In my opinion the lower grades are eaiser because you're looking at what's WRONG with a book, it's easy to see that someone stuffed it down a drain or something, but when you get to the higher grades it becomes not so much what is wrong...but what's not right...what keeps it from that 'ideal' perfect book. When you get to that sub-atomic level of grading even that small spine line starts to look pretty bad, you say it can't be PERFECT, and so you look for something to hang your hat on.

 

Lastly, and I hope I'm not too far OT at this point, I think that CGC does what PCGS does with coins. At the outset of PCGS they decided to limit the number of 70 grades given (70 being the top score, ie: a 10 in comic language). This artificial limitation boosted the rep of the company as being hard on coins and therefore every grade they gave was more trust worthy than the other guy handing out 70's like candy. So I don't think it matters at all what your book looks like because if the quota of 10's is reached then it's not gonna get that 10. If you look at the research done on PCGS you will find that the percentage of 70's given out remains the same, and never goes above the number given out by other companies, it's as if someone drew a line (or picked a %) and decided never to go over it. That, folks, is impossible in the real world of math...because what you should see over time is people catching on to what a 10 is and adjusting what they send to meet the criteria. So how this comes back to topic is this: Something HAS to be wrong with your book, it can't get a 10 and so those little marks, a slight loss of gloss, the dust mote someone blew on it BING! It's a 9.6 and order is restored to the universe. It's our attempts to get a perfect book and CGC's attempts to restrict the number of perfects given that cause this pressure and problem at the top.

[bluechip]

I think its strange that the over-all difference between a 9.8 and a 7.0 is a small corner crease and a couple spine marks. But the difference between a 5.0 and a 2.0 is a world of difference. Grading would be a lot easier if the difference between higher grades was a little more than one defect. Anyone else think this is strange?

 

 

What the top heavy grading does is to make it possible to say a book is rare when it's actually incredibly common. Even brand new.

 

And by creating top heavy grades above the highest grade in overstreet, it creates a range of indeterminate prices (multiples of high guide) which can be exploited to say a book is worth more than another copy, even though both are esssentially newsstand new.

 

And, because the uppermost grades are subjecttive -- and undefined -- it allows for books to be assigned vastly different values even when they are virtually identical -- even when the higher graded book might not be as nice as the lower value book..

 

All of which creates a market for huge markups on common and even brand new books -- which are much more reliably found than books which are actually uncommon or even rare.,

[mdandy8]

I think its strange that the over-all difference between a 9.8 and a 7.0 is a small corner crease and a couple spine marks. But the difference between a 5.0 and a 2.0 is a world of difference. Grading would be a lot easier if the difference between higher grades was a little more than one defect. Anyone else think this is strange?

 

 

What the top heavy grading does is to make it possible to say a book is rare when it's actually incredibly common. Even brand new.

 

And by creating top heavy grades above the highest grade in overstreet, it creates a range of indeterminate prices (multiples of high guide) which can be exploited to say a book is worth more than another copy, even though both are esssentially newsstand new.

 

And, because the uppermost grades are subjecttive -- and undefined -- it allows for books to be assigned vastly different values even when they are essentially identical.

 

All of which creates a market for huge markups on common and even brand new books -- which are much more reliably found than books which are actually uncommon or even rare.,

 

See for example: That flashing Ad above this post "Want a Mint?" if they can be certain to sell you one...how hard are they to find?

[TSwift25]

I think "top heavy" grading is necessary in the neurotic collecting culture where 9.4 and up sells for multiples of guide.

 

Also, when you look at pricing, the difference is proportionately expressed as it is understood that VF and above is harder to come by than VG and less.

[Mr. Zipper]

I don't know where all these conspiracy theories are coming from...

 

By definition, higher grades are the narrowest because they allow the fewest number of defects.

 

As you work your way down the grading scale, a wider number of defects are allowed in each grade range, thus making the difference between 3 points on the bottom end of the scale much more drastic than the difference of 3 points at the top end of the scale.

 

Imagine the grading scale as a pyramid, with 9.8 at the top (the narrowest number of allowable flaws) and 1.0 at the bottom of the pyramid. Accordingly, the population of books in existance can also be represented by the pyramid. Very few at the top, most at the bottom. (Of course, this doesn't apply to moderns which are almost all in high grade.)

 

So, in effect, the grading scale isn't "top heavy," it's actually bottom heavy.

[1Cool]

I just hate arguing with someone if its a 9.0 vs 9.2 because of a printing defect. Come on its not even due to someones damage. I also get frustrated when there is no "right" answer. Ten people have 6 different answers and none correct. I'm to much of a math geek to be good at some of this stuff!!

[joeypost]

Actually printing defects are allowed into the higher grades. I agree with Zippers that at the high end 9.4-10.0 the changes are so subtle that we need a third party (CGC) to determine the effect on the grade. To some, at first glance two books might look identical. Put them through a rigorous process and you will find they are not, and in the case of some a grading difference of .4 makes a world of difference.

[Mr. Zipper]

I agree with Zippers that at the high end 9.4-10.0 the changes are so subtle that we need a third party (CGC) to determine the effect on the grade.

 

Actually, I never stated that anyone needed third party grading to do this.

 

In theory, there are real differences between 9.4s, 9.6s and 9.8s that anyone with a trained eye can identify. Perhaps my years of autograph authentication has trained my eyes to be very discerning, but I can almost always accurately differentiate the difference between these grades.

 

In the real world, I suspect that many 9.6s and 9.8s are interchangable. Bear in mind, as you get closer to the top of the pyramid, the differences between the grades becomes so subtle it can be difficult to assess with a high level of consistancy.

[evilsly]

probably so hard to tell because an indeterminate but sadly not small amount of 9.8's used to be 9.6s or lower when they weren't at their 'full potential'

[mdandy8]

probably so hard to tell because an indeterminate but sadly not small amount of 9.8's used to be 9.6s or lower when they weren't at their 'full potential'

 

And so on, etc, so on.....

This is my point, because it is fairly easy to say a 9.2 is different from a 9.8 but a 9.6 and 9.8? a 9.8 or 10.0 forget it. I've read of several cases where books were cracked and submitted and had a totally different grade, so even the experts have no really reliable method to determine the differences, thus the *spoon* shoot. So when you're paying an extra 5x guide for a 9.8 for the most part you have either an overgraded 9.6 or an undergraded 10.0

 

And really THINK about the 10.0 since it is almost impossible to tell the difference between a 9.6 and a 9.8 why don't more 9.8s end up as 10? Why do you have case after case of hundreds of modern books in the 9.8 grade but 1 in a 10

 

Foolish to think there is not an artificial cap.

[bullseye]

maybe because defects are allowed in 9.8, and the only defect allowed in a 10.0 comes from grading it?

[mdandy8]

maybe because defects are allowed in 9.8, and the only defect allowed in a 10.0 comes from grading it?

 

defects allowed in 9.8 are?

 

Sorry, but I have no idea what you mean a defect comes from grading it. I would assume that if a defect was caused while grading the book that 1) it would not get a 10 and 2) there would be some sort of refund ??

 

Sorry, I'm pretty convinced there is a cap, otherwise you would see a more normal range of numbers, even if we only saw say 50%of the 9.8 numbers getting to 10 (so out of 100 new books maybe 50 are 9.4, 25 more are 9.6 then 20 of these are 9.8 and 5 are 10s something like this, but we don't even see anything close to this.

 

I just don't see how, if they can't even grade the same book a 9.8 100% of the time that they can say for certain that a 9.8 they are seeing is a lower grade than the 10 they did last month.

[Lazyboy]

In theory, 10s don't even exist. When it comes to a paper collectible with so many pages, true perfection is nearly impossible. The staples must be perfectly aligned on the spine, the cover centering must be perfect, there can't be even the slightest bindery tear, etc.

 

I have never seen a book that I would call a 10. Lots of 9.8s, but no 10s and probably no 9.9s.

 

From what I've seen, a lot of CGC 9.8 current books have bindery tears.

[AbsoluteCarnage]

Sorry to bust in on the thread guys my first time in this area as I don't buy restored books but grading as subjective as it is I somewhat have my own views indeed. I do agree that a 10 is almost an impossibility of a grade to achieve but not an actual impossibility. To be quite honest I have a book that I have in front of me right now and I'd almost bet it's a 10.0. Best book I've ever seen and I own 8 Amazing spider-man CGC 9.9's. So I guess I'm probably a good candidate for grading as I also recently pre-qualify for a few books at 9.6 and 7 of them came up 9.8's. I'll toss the one I would say is a 10 as it has a pure black cover which make this even harder to get in high grade but easier to say it is what it is! Also if ya like 9.9's my whole lot is up on Pedigree in the group listing.

[AbsoluteCarnage]

scan

[bluechip]

[

 

In the real world, I suspect that many 9.6s and 9.8s are interchangable. Bear in mind, as you get closer to the top of the pyramid, the differences between the grades becomes so subtle it can be difficult to assess with a high level of consistancy.

 

 

And that's why it's ultimately an artificial difference. A difference not in the book itself but in the label.

 

A book with manufactured rarity.

[mdandy8]

Manufactured Rarity, could not have said it better myself. Just to make myself crazy I tried to find a 9.9 issue of ASM, could not, but I only checked about 20 issues (which all looked the same, of course, 99.9 of the books graded were sitting in the 9.8 section none in 9.9, none in 10.0